Classification of indicators by strength of evidence
| Rigor | Policy-as-Code | Carbon/Energy SLOs | Storage lifecycle | Admission/Runtime controllers | Observability/Assurance artifacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strong | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 16 |
| Moderate | 1 | 25 | 1 | 0 | 34 |
| Weak | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| Unstated | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Rigor | Policy-as-Code | Carbon/Energy SLOs | Storage lifecycle | Admission/Runtime controllers | Observability/Assurance artifacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strong | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 16 |
| Moderate | 1 | 25 | 1 | 0 | 34 |
| Weak | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| Unstated | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Note(s): Strong: Clear DI locus, explicit comparator (gate, SLO), stated telemetry signal, effector path (automated, HITL), traceable assurance artifact (logs, dashboards, lineage, audit, drift, model, data card) and a design-compliance KPI (e.g. pass/fail, SLO adherence, audit completeness, bounded drift). Moderate: Some elements are present (e.g. artifact but vague KPI, or KPI but weak artifact) with reasonable operational detail. Weak: Conceptual claims with little operational detail, missing artifact or missing comparator/telemetry/effector, DI locus unclear. Unstated: Insufficient information to classify
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.